Ekanayake, L L (2006) Interface conflicts and regulatory decision making process on power projects in Sri Lanka. PhD thesis, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Abstract
Sri Lanka has a comprehensive EIA model in resolving environmental-related interface conflicts on infrastructural projects. The evidence suggests that the EIA model is partly responsible for escalating conflicts. Thus, this study attempts to identify drawbacks in the Sri Lankan EIA model to propose measures to resolve environment-related interface conflicts on power projects. Three case studies on proposed major power generation projects were analysed. The findings revealed that interface conflicts are intensified due to the drawbacks in the EIA model provisions, practices, and its enforcement. Amendments to the existing EIA model were suggested and validated. AHP model and pairwise questionnaire analysis revealed the stakeholders' preferred option was 'conditional-acceptance' and the least preferred option was 'non-acceptance' for all the cases. The results suggest that EIA-related interface conflicts on power projects in Sri Lanka can be resolved by facilitating wider stakeholder involvement. The proposed model is capable of promoting stakeholders' consensus on project options. Thus, it can be used to mitigate EIA-related interface conflicts in Sri Lanka.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Ofori, G |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | conflicts; decision making; power generation; Sri Lanka; case study; stakeholder |
| Index terms: | power generation, option, enforcement, Sri Lanka, decision-making process, case study, stakeholder involvement, evidence, questionnaire, decision-making, infrastructural project |
| Subjects: | health safety and environment, Geography, infrastructure engineering, decision analysis, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, energy systems, participation process |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Health and Safety, Sustainability, Risk Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here